Kolkata Court November 2013 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Srianand Heemghar Private Limited and ors. Vs. the West Bengal State F ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-22-2013
WP No.1133 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE SRIANAND HEEMGHAR PRIVATE LIMITED & ORS.Versus THE WEST BENGAL STATE FINANCIAL CORPORATION LIMITED & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SANJIB BANERJEE Date : 22nd November, 2013. Appearance: Mr.Ranjan Kali, Adv.Mr.A.K. Sur, Adv.The Court : The petitioners seek to challenge a sale notice published by the West Bengal Financial Corporation on November 1, 2013 on the ground that no previous notice of thirty days has been issued by the West Bengal Financial Corporation to the borrower in accordance with the guidelines indicated in the Supreme Court judgment of Kerala Financial Corporation versus Vincent Paul reported at (2011).SCC171 2 The respondent Corporation refers to the several notices issued by the Corporation from time to time culminating in the final notice of December 18, 2012 by which the Corporation informed the borrower that possession of the factory of the borrower would be taken on J...
Appellant Vs. Respondent
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-22-2013
CA No.442 of 2013 CP No.65 of 1984 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Original Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE RE: SHREE AMBICA JUTE MILLS LTD.(IN LIQN) Appearance: Mr.Santi Ranjan Pal, (in person)...for Sr.Nirman. Mr.O.P.Tripathi, Adv...for the Rail Line India. Mr.Bardi Narayan Modi (in person) ...for Rajendra Ispat PVT.LTD.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SANJIB BANERJEE Date : November 22, 2013. The Court : Two plots of land owned by the company in liquidation in Belur, one measuring approximately 75,695 sq.ft and the other approximately 4157 sq.ft, are put up for sale pursuant to the advertisements published by the official liquidator. properties are under the occupation of tenants or occupieRs.Both The bigger plot is in occupation of Ganesh Industries and the smaller plot is in occupation of Rail Line India. Serious bids have been made in open court on behalf of Rajendra Private seeking Ispat Limited to vakalatnama. Private Limited represented represent such by and their bidders Sr.Nirman direct...
Consulting Engineering Services (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Government of We ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-22-2013
ORDER SHEET T No.291 of 2013 TA No.116 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE CONSULTING ENGINEERING SERVICES (INDIA) PVT.LTD.Versus GOVERNMENT OF WEST BENGAL, IRRIGATION & WATERWAYS DIRECTORATE BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE I.P.MUKERJ.Date : 22nd November, 2013. Appearance: Mr.Surajit Nath Mitra, Sr.Advocate Mr.Arindam Mukherjee, Advocate Mr.D.K.Jain, Advocate for the plaintiff/petitioner Mr.Ashoke Kumar Banerjee, Sr.Advocate & Govt. Pleader Mr.Sakya Sen, Advocate for the State of West Bengal The Court: After the storm Aila, the West Bengal government undertook the task of embankment remodelling, restructuring, strengthening and so on, in the Sunderbans, North and South 24 Parganas. Initially it proposed to do so along a stretc.of 834 KMs.The project would cost Rs.5,800 crores. It was divided into stages. Work was also divided amongst contractors in packages. After August, 2010, the government thought it feasible, to restrict the work to...
The Statesman Limited Vs. Europcell Gmbh
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-22-2013
1 ORDER SHEET APD No.283 of 2012 CS No.224 of 2005 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Civil Appellate Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE THE STATESMAN LIMITED Versus EUROPCELL GMBH BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE BANERJEE, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE The Hon'ble JUSTICE DEBANGSU BASAK Date : 22nd November, 2013. Appearance: Mr.Abhijit Chatterjee, Sr.Advocate with Mr.Anindya Basu and Mr.Supriya Ranjan Saha Ld. Advocates for the appellant. Mr.Jishnu Saha and Mr.R.K. Khanna And Mr.S.Chowdhury, ld. Advocates for the respondent. The Court :-This appeal would arise out of a decree passed in an application for judgment upon admission under Order 12 Rule 6 of the Code of Civil Procedure at the instance of the respondent-plaintiff. The facts would depict, the appellant imported newsprint from Germany from the respondent, but did not pay the cost of the consignment. The appellant would take the plea of delay in delivery, whereas the respondent would deny the same. There were altogether four letters appearing at pages 2...
Tata Capital Ltd. Vs. Maheshwary Ispat Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-22-2013
CA No.506 of 2013 CP No.560 of 2011 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA ORIGINAL JURISDICTION IN THE MATTER OF : MAHESHWARY ISPAT LTD.-ANDTATA CAPITAL LTD.-VSMAHESHWARY ISPAT LTD.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SANJIB BANERJEE Date : 22nd November, 2013. Appearance: Mr.Tilak Bose, Sr.Adv.Ms.Manju Bhuteria, Adv.Mr.Ratnanko Banerji, Adv.Mr.Jishnu Chowdhury, Mr.Soumava Ghosh, Ms.Rajshree Kajaria, Ms.Sonia Sharma, Adv.Adv.Adv.Adv.The Court : The petitioning-creditor has applied under Section 450 of the Companies Act, 1956 for appointment of a provisional liquidator. The primary grounds indicated are the failure of the company to make payment in instalments in terms of the appellate order of March 13, 2013 and the failure by the company to comply with the statutory requisites of holding its annual general meeting by the end of September, 2013 and filing its annual accounts with the Registrar of Companies. The company says that it will make every effort to ensure that the defaulted instalments are mad...
Badan Chand Goswami Vs. Calcutta Electricity Supply Corp. Ltd.and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-22-2013
ORDER SHEET WP No.388 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION ORIGINAL SIDE BADAN CHAND GOSWAMI Versus CALCUTTA ELECTRICITY SUPPLY CORP. LTD.& ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SOUMEN SEN Date : 22nd November, 2013. Appearance: Mr.Hiranmoy Bhattacharyya, Adv.Mr.Tanmoy Mukherjee, Adv.Mr.Sounak Bhattacharya, Adv..for the petitioner. Mr.Madhusudan Saha Roy, Adv..for the respondent nos.1 to 4. Mr.Amitava Ghosh, Adv.Mr.Sourav Chtterjee, Adv..for the respondent no.5. Mr.Kushal Chatterjee, Adv..for the respondent no.6. The Court: The petitioner claims to be a beneficiary of a Will executed by Madhabi Mukherjee whereby and whereunder she bequeathed her all movable and immovable property including premises No.59A/1A, Raja Rajballab Street, Kolkata-700003 in favour of the present petitioner. The petitioner claims to be a sole executor from legatee under the aforesaid Will. The petitioner further contends that the petitioner has been residing in the aforesaid premises...
Hitech Engineering Corp.India Pvt.Ltd Vs. Clastar Sponge Ltd and anr.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-22-2013
1 ORDER SHEET APO No.153 of 2013 CS No.100 of 2012 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Civil Appellate Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE HI-TECH ENGINEERING CORP.INDIA PVT.LTD Versus CLASTAR SPONGE LTD & ANR. BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE BANERJEE,ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE The Hon'ble JUSTICE DEBANGSU BASAK Date : 22nd November, 2013. Appearance: Mr.Rupak Ghosh with Mr.Sambuddha Banerjee Ld. Advocates for the appellant. Mr.Debdutta Sen, Mr.J.B. Panda with Mr.Rishav Dutta, ld. Advocates For the respondent. The into an agreement for Court :- The supply of a parties boiler. entered Under the agreement the appellant was supposed to supply the boiler to be installed at the respondents place. According to the appellant, the boiler was ready for installation. The respondent was not in a position to accept the same in the absence of appropriate drawings being furnished that gave rise to the controversy. At the time of entering into the contract, the respondent advanced Rs.1.53 crore to the appellant in exchange o...
Ankit Sureka Vs. the Calcutta Electricity Supply Corporation (Cesc) Lt ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-22-2013
WP1122of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA ORIGINAL SIDE ANKIT SUREKA Versus THE CALCUTTA ELECTRICITY SUPPLY CORPORATION (CESC) LTD.& ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SOUMEN SEN Date : 22nd November, 2013. For the petitioner : Mr.Sunny Nandy,Advocate Mr.Dyutimoy Paul,Advocate For the respondent No.4 : Mr.Somnath Ganguly,Advocate Mr.Gora Chand Samanta,Advocate Mr.Subir Sanyal,Advocate appeaRs.Mr.Somnath Bose,Advocate appeaRs.The Court :- The primary reason for filing the writ petition appears to be to settle a dispute between the landlord and the tenant with regard to the electricity bills raised by the landlord which the petitioner/tenant claims to be the exorbitant. It is not in dispute that the supply is being efffected through sub meters and such arrangement was continuing for long. Pursuant to the order passed by this Court on 31st March,2013, the District Engineer considered the prayer of the petitioner and has opined that supply to the entire premises are being catered through th...
Pradip Kumar Dutt Vs. Siddartha Chatterjee and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-22-2013
ORDER SHEET APO315OF2013CS241OF2013IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Civil Appellate Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE PRADIP KUMAR DUTT Versus SIDDARTHA CHATTERJEE & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE ASHIM KUMAR BANERJEE, ACJ. The Hon'ble JUSTICE DEBANGSU BASAK Date : 22nd November, 2013. The Court : This appeal would involve a pure question of law as to whether in the given circumstance Section 15 (1)(a) or 15 (2)(a) of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 would apply. The suit would involve a property left by a female Hindu who left her surviving her husband as well as her daughter from the fiRs.marriage of the lady. Pertinent to note, the lady married second time and the plaintiff/appellant is the second husband. inherited the property from her parents. The female Hindu talked about, Under Section 15 (1)(a) the property should go to her children and the husband whereas Section 15(2)(a) would debar the husband to get it in absence of any children. The learned Judge, however, accepted the interpretatio...
Rashmi Bubna Vs. Karnani Finance Enterprise Ltd. and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Nov-22-2013
ORDER SHEET GA NO.1562 OF2013WITH CS NO.13 OF2013IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE RASHMI BUBNA Versus KARNANI FINANCE ENTERPRISE LTD.& ORS. BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE I.P.MUKERJ.Date : 22nd November, 2013. Mr.S.N.Mitra, senior advocate, Mr.D.K.Jainappear. Mr.R.Banerjee, Mr.K.Thakkar, Mr.A.Poddar, Mr.S.Ghoshappear. Mr.S.N.Mookherjee, senior advocate, Mr.A.Roy, Ms.V.Bhatiaappear. The Court : Several valuable properties in Kolkata were owned and controlled by three companies founded by one Mr.Rajendra Kumar Karnani, now dead. These were Karnani Finance Enterprise & Ors., Nilachal Minerals LTD.and Indrapuri Studios PVT.LTD.& Ors.The valuable properties are at Synagogue Street, Kolkata [one property]., Rabindra Sarani, Kolkata [six properties].and Indrapuri Studio, Tollygunge [one property].After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, I am quite clear in my mind that ultimately during trial of the suit this Court would have to determine...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »